Thinking Tools/Frameworks vs.Discussion
Thinking tools/frameworks improve thinking skill much more than discussion does. One reason is that in discussion it's very difficult to pay attention to the thinking process rather than the content (because the content is interesting).
Understanding vs Use (of the thinking tools)
Understanding will never lead to use. Use can only come from habit and habit can only come from practice.
Understanding vs Use (of the thinking tools)
Understanding will never lead to use. Use can only come from habit and habit can only come from practice.
Replies to This Discussion
-
Permalink Reply by Andy on -
Kim and Dennis, your posts about the function or purpose of this site are supported by the mission statement on the front page.
-
Permalink Reply by Phil Bachmann on -
Kim,
In writing the AGO I was not advocating a new set of goals for the de Bono Society, merely suggesting goals specifically focused on increasing the de Bono tool use on this site.
-
Permalink Reply by Linda Laird on -
It is important to remember to make people who are not comfortable with the tools, comfortable. This site is for everyone not just people who are good at the tools. That means they are allowed to make mistakes - often one can only learn from making mistakes and they should never be chastised for it.
If we make the asumption that everyone else can't walk then we become helpful and understanding, and when they fall we have empathy!
There is no right and wrong - just understanding of perception.
This week Edward will set out some pratice items for thinkers to do, there will be skill appropriate levels.
-
Permalink Reply by Andy on
-
(This site is not just for practising thinking methods.) How do you look for the plus points about something? What are the methods - from the very general to the (very) specific? This concerns doing a PMI or using the Yellow Hat, etc. De Bono defines thinking as 'the deliberate exploration of experience for a purpose'. If your purpose is to look for plus points, how exactly can you deliberately explore your experience for this purpose? Again: What are the methods - from the very general to the (very) specific? One method involves using associations.
-
Permalink Reply by Andy on
-
(This site is not just for practising dr de Bono's thinking tools.)
Phil,
Really sorry for replying so late.
Phil Bachmann said:For a particular de Bono Tool, make it easy for newcomers to:
- Understand what is required to complete a practise item.
- Feel that they can do it.
Please see: http://www.debonosociety.com/profiles/blogs/thinking-frameworks-eas.... Also, clear examples help us learn the tools before we can practice them. My very incomprehensive summary of the tools leaves out a lot of things (e.g. examples) that help understanding. Hopefully, we can all add clear examples.
If we do a practice item about a situation that we think we have a lot of thoughts on, we will have more output ("Feel that they can do it."). But only some items should be of this type because you don't have to think especially much if you already have a lot of answers.
If we do, say, a PMI and don't find any points, then we have still become better at thinking and strengthened our habit of always looking at both sides of a matter.
Phil Bachmann said:
This depends (among other things) on the sense of achievement we get and maybe also from the theoretical understanding of the need to improve thinking skill. We can also think of things that we have done or that has happened to us where they would have turned out better if, say, both sides of the matter had been considered (at all or in depth) - this may increase our motivation to practice the PMI.- Make them want to do it.
Phil Bachmann said:
Maybe the sense of achievement we get from doing an item, can make us want to do more. Also, they are intended to be fun to do - we can choose those items we think are fun. Dr de Bono says it's important to have a mix of items of the four types but I think maybe it's better to not have a mix and only have such items you like than not want to practice at all. Then after a bit time you can have items of all the four types. But maybe it's not so hard to find items of the four types if we look for them. Anyway, I think it's better to practice than to look for practice items, so that's why I started these discussions for making a catalogue of items. Also, there is a "discussion" which is only a list of practice items with no thinking output from anyone (but it's empty right now).- Once they have done it, make them want to do more.
Phil Bachmann said:
Maybe after enough practice we may become enough skilled that we want to show off this skill. This is different from showing off how much information or knowledge we have. Until then we don't have to show our thinking output from doing practice items but we can still add items.- Make them want to show others what they have done.
Phil Bachmann said:
I hope the points above help answer this, and also, about being well-trained: as dr de Bono says, even if we're not excellent tennis players, we may still enjoy playing tennis and improving our skill.I know that Dennis Perrin did fine on some of the tasks you set him, but what about people who are not as well trained or initially motivated?
-
Permalink Reply by Andy on
-
Hi Clementine,
Clementine Clarkesville said:If thinking tools/frameworks improve thinking skill much more than discussion does,then what is the point of having this subject as a something to discuss?
Using http://www.debonosociety.com/forum/topics/how-to-have-a-beautiful-mind: In order to agree, I'm going to consider a special circumstance: only looking at people who (through their own experience) agree with the statement of this discussion. They may not need to discuss the point in order to explore it (which can also be done using the frameworks themselves) or in order to agree/disagree, so this discussion may be superfluous.
Clementine Clarkesville said:And reguarding understanding dont we use understanding to lead us,therfore if we habitually develope understanding are we not practicing its use?
(Could you please give me a (specific, clear) example?)
De Bono is only referring to the understanding and use of the thinking frameworks (as far as I know). *Some* understanding of the tools is necessary before we can practice them - or we wouldn't understand what (or how) to practice. But we may understand perfectly how a PMI works and everything else about it, but still never use the PMI. This is because it's not one of our habits (to use it) and then we never remember to do a PMI.
We can recall a mistake we have made and see whether it was because we didn't look (enough) for the pros and cons (and interesting aspects (doing a PMI)) of the matter before taking the decision. Often this is so. But everyone UNDERSTANDS the usefulness of looking (enough) for pros and cons, so why didn't we do so? Because our habit of doing so was not strong enough, or, we didn't have the habit to look enough for the pros (etc).
-
Permalink Reply by Andy on
-
(To everyone: Despite all the talk about tools/frameworks this site is not just about them.)
(Clementine said:) "1. No matter how you choose to explore i believe that when this process starts whether alone or in a group you start to find that some sort of discussion is taking place as you start the discovery of some sort of understanding or learning,you do not have to speak to someone else to discuss.My point was that i felt de Bono was elimnating the probability that discussion actually brought about the idea of thinking tools/frameworks as it didnt just appear just like the 6 hats...."
Yes, if we define discussion as "considering or examining (in speech or writing)" then all thinking is discussion, with or without using the frameworks/tools. But I think de Bono means "ordinary discussion", that is, "discussion without using the frameworks". Maybe it would have been better if he had written so.
(You said:) My example....You understand the method of the six hats,therefore understanding this method leads you maybe to more success,therfore if you continue to become successful each time you use this method,its possible it could become habit forming which then means you are practicing its use.Many examples could be used but this one i thought maybe the simplist and most relevant....
Thanks for the simple and relevant example. Your point depends on how much/little you use the frameworks without first having practised them on a variety of short practice items. I guess you would use them a little even if you didn't deliberately practise, and things would be as in your example (assuming you actually obtain success - you may have low skill in the use of the hats because you haven't practised them). But you would only use them "a little" compared with if you had practised them deliberately without really trying to use the hats to reach your goals (i.e. during the practice sessions). You need to keep your attention on the hats, and not on the content you're using them, in order to really increase your skill and in order to develop the habit of using them. You can't do this (well) when you're not using the hats on a variety of short (e.g. 3 minutes) practice items. Also, you need to practise them on a variety of items, not just on one or a few types (look at de Bono's four types). For example, we need the "fun items" because they involve less or no feelings and prejudice, which makes it easier to practise thinking skills and improve them. Practising the frameworks only on personal problems makes it difficult to keep attention on the process instead of on the content (because of the emotional content, etc.).
-
Permalink Reply by Franis on -
I'm on the outside of the sequence of this discussion as it's going in this moment, but wanted to contribute my impressions to revert to the original question. Of course, varying alternate ways of defining the question points attention in directions to seek answers.
As I understand it, some questions are:
How can people not get seduced by content or what everyone else does? How can people focus instead on strengthening the constructive means - the How of thinking skill? What motivates people to remember to think?
So - these are my first impressions:
Make the content boring, funny or not make sense so the "How" becomes focal.
Need ways to compensate for time of arrival. (Blue hat, yes; but I'll bet there are further perceptual means & actions that might contribute to this.)
Enhance the meaning of the result - in a sense, make the goal more attractive. (Such as in story-telling and testimonials of how people have benefited.)
Make a way for people to interject as they are respond to what other people have done -" I could do better than that!!"
Appeal to people who love to brag or show and tell, they will popularize the activity to others and make it into a "fad." ( Bumper stickers, Badge of identity - "I Think Before Reacting. ...Usually!") ...would be great on a car bumper.
;o)
OK, back to the question itself. For me, questions that are framed in "opposites" beg to be restated in the positive. (Thus, my proliferation of restatement.) What is "opposite" is culturally defined. Instead, take away the implication that one concept is at odds with the next concept.
Some of these could be:
How come thinking tools - and frameworks - improve thinking skills the way they do? Can we describe more about how thinking skills and examining the frames of how we are thinking work more effectively than discussion to better, problem solve & create?
Frames...Re-Framing...Why not draw more pictures (mind-mapping style) while linearly discussing to help note our tangents and return to what has been left out?
(Mind-mapping in this case would be used during discussion as a variant of recognizing the value of framework.)
So, reversing: Transform discussion by applying tools of thought.
(As opposed to the urge educated people usually have to imagine we can transform thought by applying tools of discussion, ie: taking turns at lecturing.)
Since, seldom is there "only one" answer to everything... once we ask that question some of the answers might be...
Take out the desire to convince (the debate model) from the discussion activity.
Go slow - speed of arrival tends to activate habitual routines, as well as get everyone excited & encourage them to compete for things like "most original", "fastest delivery", "limited time."
(That's why this medium is so wonderful! I can take as much time as I need here.)
Ask specifically for a certain person's contribution. (This brings reticent people forward, because talking style doesn't have anything to do with thinking ability and this action might minimize competition.)
Figure out other ways to invite contribution.
Allow 'secret ballot' contributions. - (Make a certain part of this forum entirely anonymous? The idea of a free-play space without the authority of authorship where ideas are separated from who had them.)
Then the second question: Understanding vs Use
Since I was a person who tended to use words such as "Never" and "Always" I have learned to spot these words as an indicator that some powerful assumptions could be in place that might benefit from examination and revision.
Idea: Identify certain words as trigger indicators that: Thinking Now Would Be A Good Idea
Let's say skillful use doesn't come from habit, it comes from fascination. (That has been the case with me.) How to foster fascination for thought?
Perhaps appeal to the "gamboling chance" of novelty: a significant result or insight often occurs unexpectedly. Hindsight is 20/20, but foresight is...boring and careful. What if thinking skills 7 foresight were presented as a way to get ready to be lucky? A way to shine intuition? A person would hone thinking skills because it would sometimes result in a "jackpot" of benefits. Most of these "jackpots" of major scientific discoveries come from noting accidents. Insights come from noting points that were never before combined.
These new accidents don't have a chance to happen if experimentation is not allowed. "I make as many mistakes as it takes."
So practicing the tapping of the unknown would extend tolerance for unfamiliarity. What is new feels strange, unclassified, so a tolerance for what feels strange at first needs to be practiced. Otherwise people revert to habitual means, and the ease of creative thinking is regarded as "hard to do."
This could be practiced at a perceptual level. (Provide people with perceptual illusion experiences to butter them up? Make them laugh?) Sustaining a state of unanswered, unknowable questioning enhances the ability to be open to spotting an assumption that had been overlooked, the inception of discovery. Pre-discovery. Virtual question.
-
Permalink Reply by Ed Bernacki on -
Hello
I am very interested in the concept of new thinking tools.
I often use something Canadian Marshall McLuhan once said, “We shape our tools, and they in turn shape us.” This begs the question - what tools do we use to shape our thinking to be creative?
The point made by Dr de Bono that it is "difficult to pay attention to the thinking process rather than the content" --- is dead on.
I believe we have yet to conceive a new generation of tools that prompt our thinking in new ways. Considering that most executives and managers still use blank pads of paper and have little knowledge of "brain storming" tools, we have a long way to go!
-
Permalink Reply by Franis on
-
It's true that understanding has little to do with "walking your talk." You can understand all you want, but until you do what will make you actually improve, it's all a moot point.
Repeating anything creates a habit; the mind loves to create a a program to deal with repeating circumstances. It's a curious thing to make creativity a habit, because the nature of it is innovative. Innovation cultivates, by nature, an expanding tolerance for what feels unfamiliar. So I guess, unfamiliarity can become a habit such as any other habit... but it doesn't feel like a habit. It feels more like a hobby or a talent or a pull to question...an insatiable curiosity.
So I would say that these feelings - of curiosity, talent, wisdom, drive, persistence and perseverance - are not so much of a habit as a motive. They definitely need cultivation to develop. What do you think?
It's not something put into place by traditional education. Definitely traditional education focuses on classifying what is allowed and what is not allowed - right and wrong answers. Those things which are creatively unclassified are not rewarded, and are considered "wrong." The quip for this was made by an artist friend of mine...don't know what name he is using these days, but when I knew him he was Kenneth Feld.
"I make as many mistakes as it takes."
-
Permalink Reply by Vijay Todi on -
samir said:In repetition skills are develope not abilities,but we have to search more possible ways to develope abilities and designing things.
-
Permalink Reply by Vijay Todi on
-
It is certainly great to think "out of patterns" instead of "along the patterns". (This is possible only 2% of the times) But is it enough?
If we can cease to make new patterns and keep erasing the existing ones, it will lead us to GREAT results. In such case, we need not deliberately attempt to escape the patterns through creative thinking tools. We shall be able to think creative in absolutely natural course. Such creative thinking & actions would happen 98% of the times.
To do so, we need to train our subconscious mind. Please visit www.dhamma.com and let me have your views.
Franis said:It's true that understanding has little to do with "walking your talk." You can understand all you want, but until you do what will make you actually improve, it's all a moot point.
Repeating anything creates a habit; the mind loves to create a a program to deal with repeating circumstances. It's a curious thing to make creativity a habit, because the nature of it is innovative. Innovation cultivates, by nature, an expanding tolerance for what feels unfamiliar. So I guess, unfamiliarity can become a habit such as any other habit... but it doesn't feel like a habit. It feels more like a hobby or a talent or a pull to question...an insatiable curiosity.
So I would say that these feelings - of curiosity, talent, wisdom, drive, persistence and perseverance - are not so much of a habit as a motive. They definitely need cultivation to develop. What do you think?
It's not something put into place by traditional education. Definitely traditional education focuses on classifying what is allowed and what is not allowed - right and wrong answers. Those things which are creatively unclassified are not rewarded, and are considered "wrong." The quip for this was made by an artist friend of mine...don't know what name he is using these days, but when I knew him he was Kenneth Feld.
"I make as many mistakes as it takes."
© 2013 Created by Administrator.
Powered by
